Chopin's Fantasy

[ludwig]

op.49

    I'm playing this piece at the moment, I'm not sure how to approach it musically though. I've got a couple of recording which makes the piece rather uncomfortable to listen to. This is because of the extremely fast tempo and rushed feeling I get whenever I listen to them. Am i suppose to play it like that? Can anyone tell me a good recording of this piece? OR is this how its suppose to sound like?   Also, anybody have any tips on how to approach the fantasy?

[ned]

Ludwig:
You have picked a masterpiece! Your instincts are right.  Speed will definitely kill it. Listen to Artur Rubinstein's recording. I heard him play it several times in concert and it was magnificent - sonorous, noble and just the right tempo. Kissin's recording is even slower in the beginning and very good. There is so much rich detail in this piece that going slower will not hurt. Once you have mastered the notes, the music will lead you naturally. Over time you will see more and more possibilities in each measure. Be your own judge!  
Ned

[rachfan]

I second ned's choice here.  I prefer  the Rubinstein recording of the Fantasy too.  It's very magisterial.  You can't go wrong with that one.

[frederic]

My advise is try not to listen to any recording while learning it. It will make you want to play it very fast. You have to approach this work yourself and play it the way you think Chopin would have wanted it without copying concert pianists' ideas of playing it. The tempo is the last thing to worry about so right now just master the notes remaining faithful to what Chopin has wrote, practice slowly and when you're ready, gradually get faster to the right tempo.
On the other hand, listening to recordings can be helpful too!  

[ludwig]

  Hey ned, I found the Kissin recording (live) performance of this piece. I must say that it was extremely fast during the triplet climbs, and also the lh/rh 4 against 6. I haven't heard the Rubinstein. I've also noticed a few wierd chord progessions in the 3/4 slow section. Has anyone else noticed this? or am I playing too many double sharps =p ? anyways. thanks for the advice. I don't intend to play the piece at an unmanageble speed, just the most comfortable speed I can get.

[rachfan]

I want to expand on Frederic's point as it goes far beyond the Chopin Fantasy.  When I'm learning a new piece (even one I'm fairly familiar with), I steer clear of all recordings.  The reason is that I want to build my own concept and interpretation of the work.  In other words, I certainly want stay within the bounds of performance practices, but I also want to put my own "stamp" on my performance through a process of individual discovery and re-creation of the composer's intent.  

Once I have the piece up to a 90% level, only then will I  listen to someone else's rendition.  The purpose is not to get a sense of the form, shape and coloration of the work, as I've already figured that out for myself.  Rather, I listen carefully for accuracy of detail, matching my playing in my "mind's ear" to what the other pianist is doing--and NOT to be influenced in any way.  Rather it's for a more pedestrian purpose, frankly.  A few times over the years I found a wrong note!!!  Twice it turned out to be my error.  The other time it was the recording artist's mistake.  Following that check, I don't have to listen to the recording again.  If I want to hear the music, I need only play it myself!

So my advice to other pianists would be to ignore recordings at the outset, commune with the composer, develop a sound interpretation, pay attention to performance practices from the period and style of the music, and listen to a recording only once you have already completed most of your work on the piece.  

[ludwig]

Rachfan and Federic,

  That's an interesting way you mentioned about not hearing any recordings of a piece whilst learning it. But what would you do if you missed on some important details and it was becoming a habit, that once you've heard the recording you can't change your ways? So does that mean all the pieces you guys have played you've never listened to prior to learning it? usually I get my pieces to a level where I could play all the notes, then I listen to my recordings, section by section, then while doing that, I try to listen to their intepretations, (a few recordings and comparing them,) listen for things which I've missed, such as wrong notes, wrong articulation etc... Anyways, enough blab from me, and sorry for being off topic.

[rachfan]

Hi Ludwig,

When I learn a piece--slowly, as slow practice is essential--I watch every detail like a hawk.  (When studying with a teacher, some people, not all, become lazy and wait for her to point out any mistakes.  When you study alone, you have a serious obligation to do all that for yourself, as an obligation to the composer and the art.)  I start with the notes and rhythm.  Then I pay more attention to phrasing details.  Voice leading and chord voicing become important here too.  Next, I start to bring in all the dynamics.  I save pedaling until this later point, because in learning at first, I want the fingers to do all the work without the pedal.  As I'm doing all this, I keep fingerings somewhat tentative.  I can't tell you how often, in first learning a piece, I believed I had the best fingering for a passage only to discover a better one later on.  And yes, a new fingering always means relearning the passage and breaking and reestablishing habits.  

I make this approach l sound quite "linear", but only to show a general thought process.  Actually some of these things are happening in tandem as opposed to a strict and precise sequence.  Once I can articulate the piece, then I concentrate on matters of interpretation and its finer points.

If I pick up a piece by Chopin, Debussy, Rachmaninoff, etc.  I already know how it generally "goes", so I don't need a recording as a crutch to steer me through the learning process.  (When I was young and less familiar with the repertoire, I did need that crutch more often though.)  Right now, if I were to study a complex piece with which I was truly unfamiliar, or a seldom heard piece of a well-known composer, in a case like that I might listen to a recording first, rather than waiting until I had the piece completely playable.  But those would be the exceptions, not the rule.  

[dinosaurtales]

I suppose this would depend on my familiarity with the piece I am learning to play, but, I had a similar dilemma, where I had a recording of a piece that simply *blew off* a lot of the written dynamics, phrasings, etc.  This is actually quite common, and my piano teacher suggests that the recording be used as inspiration, and that your own attention to detail plus your musical abilities will produce good results just fine without *imitating.*

[rachfan]

That's great advice about using the recording for inspiration.  Sometimes too in gaining that inspiration, you can take in the piece in the broadest perspective and get a sense of its "sweep" in the playing.  Just having that concept alone can  help you to  better arrange all the details toward the desired overall effect.

[frederic]

I agree with Rachfan

Ludwig, when listening to recordings you sort of rely on your aural skills to pick up the details and just imitating what you hear and you become familiar with the rhythm, notes etc.
I personally think that learning from the score will be more benificial.
But as rachfan said, unfimiliar pieces you do need a bit of listen so you can decide whether you enjoy this piece or not.